Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Just a thought about the next version of FreeDOS… It does not seem that it has yet been decided if the next version of FreeDOS should be 1.3.1, 1.3-SR1, 1.4 or 2.0. However, there is no technical reason it needs to be just one line. The current RBE (release build environment) and package

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi, > On Apr 2, 2022, at 10:20 PM, David Ormand wrote: > > In the discussion about what version to assign to the next release: > It has been my understanding that the version number code x.y is defined as: > x is the major number, which indicates a change in interface or function or > some

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

In the discussion about what version to assign to the next release: It has been my understanding that the version number code x.y is defined as: x is the major number, which indicates a change in interface or function or some other large-scale impact, possibly with implications to backward

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hello all, My ideal FreeDOS 2.0 would be something like this below. There might be some points that I’m not quite versed in, so bear with me. I would like the FreeDOS 2.0 release to make FreeDOS a single-repo, and coherent operating system with a unified design language and development

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Unless something huge changed about freedos I think “1.4” should be the next version apposed to a jump to 2.0 and while its nice to update packages to the latest versions what is the problem developers are trying to fix? What is the roadmap? Like its been a while since ive actually used

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

On Thu, Mar 31, 2022 at 9:10 PM Michael Brutman wrote: > > Please forgive me for getting lost on this thread, but what exactly > is the problem that we are trying to solve? > > Are we trying to make things simpler for novice users? Advanced users? > FreeDOS maintainers (Jerome in particular) ? >

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> On Apr 1, 2022, at 7:42 AM, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel > wrote: > > Maybe we should come back to the question wheter we should continue > to use ibiblio for releasing packages, or should concentrate on a > (gitlab or github) repository. > On Fri, Apr 1, 2022 at 7:57 AM Jerome Shidel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> On Apr 1, 2022, at 7:42 AM, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel > wrote: > >  > Activé jeu., 31 mars 2022 21:42:12 -0400 Michael Brutman > écrit > > Please forgive me for getting lost on this thread, but what exactly is the > problem that we are trying to solve? > > Are we

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Activé jeu., 31 mars 2022 21:42:12 -0400 Michael Brutman écrit Please forgive me for getting lost on this thread, but what exactly is the problem that we are trying to solve? Are we trying to make things simpler for novice users?  Advanced users? 

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

EVERYBODY! -- Gregory On 3/31/2022 9:42 PM, Michael Brutman wrote: Please forgive me for getting lost on this thread, but what exactly is the problem that we are trying to solve? Are we trying to make things simpler for novice users? Advanced users?  FreeDOS maintainers (Jerome in

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Please forgive me for getting lost on this thread, but what exactly is the problem that we are trying to solve? Are we trying to make things simpler for novice users? Advanced users? FreeDOS maintainers (Jerome in particular) ? -Mike ___

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi Adam, > On Mar 29, 2022, at 9:24 AM, Adam Peart wrote: > > If you had the base install by default, and gave the option to install the > separate categories as options that would work. If you wanted go go into > more details then you could list each item in each category and let people >

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

If you had the base install by default, and gave the option to install the separate categories as options that would work.  If you wanted go go into more details then you could list each item in each category and let people choose individually, but that would probably be too much work

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Per Jim’s recent post, I went ahead and split the repositories (no symlink’d repos) as well as created a new one for the eventual upcoming 2.0. Also, I added a simple index file to help visitors browsing those repositories more easily navigate to the HTML pages.

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> On Mar 28, 2022, at 6:04 PM, Eric Auer wrote: > > > Hi! > >> Jim has mentioned the possibility of slimming down the release some for 2.0. >> At present we have the options of BASE, BASE + SOURCES, FULL, FULL + SOURCES >> durning installation. >> But with how easy package installation is

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi! Jim has mentioned the possibility of slimming down the release some for 2.0. At present we have the options of BASE, BASE + SOURCES, FULL, FULL + SOURCES durning installation. But with how easy package installation is after the initial install using FDIMPLES, I wonder why bother with

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Activé lun., 28 mars 2022 13:43:58 -0400 Jerome Shidel écrit Linux distress behave the same way. The online repository provides the newest version of the packages. When you select to install something from online, it does not install the old version that would have come with the

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi Jim, > On Mar 28, 2022, at 1:40 PM, Jim Hall wrote: > > On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 10:41 AM Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel > > wrote: >> >>> The branches that receive updates (1.2, 1.3, latest) contain the latest >>> version of the packages that we

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> On Mar 28, 2022, at 11:40 AM, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel > wrote: > > The branches that receive updates (1.2, 1.3, latest) contain the latest > version of the packages that we have created. I don’t see a reason to add a > new branch. If we decided to change package file extensions

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

On Mon, Mar 28, 2022 at 10:41 AM Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel wrote: > >> The branches that receive updates (1.2, 1.3, latest) contain the latest >> version of the packages that we have created. I don’t see a reason >> to add a new branch. If we decided to change package file extensions >>

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

If you are thinking about another FreeDOS distro, you may consider inquiring about a 8086 version. IIRC a few people use but it is quite difficult do setup, so a simple image or release can be very helpfull Just a random thought, Alain Em 28/03/2022 12:40, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

The branches that receive updates (1.2, 1.3, latest) contain the latest version of the packages that we have created. I don’t see a reason to add a new branch. If we decided to change package file extensions (and possibly format), 1.2 and 1.3 would be detached from Latest. And most likely would

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> On Mar 28, 2022, at 10:20 AM, Paul Dufresne via Freedos-devel > wrote: > > Activé lun., 28 mars 2022 08:24:15 -0400 Jerome Shidel > écrit >> But with how easy package installation is after the initial install using >> FDIMPLES, I wonder >> why bother with FULL at all? Why not

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Activé lun., 28 mars 2022 08:24:15 -0400 Jerome Shidel écrit >But with how easy package installation is after the initial install using >FDIMPLES, I wonder > why bother with FULL at all? Why not just install BASE? The user could > install additional packages later For people

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi, Back to the FreeDOS 2.0 topic… Jim has mentioned the possibility of slimming down the release some for 2.0. At present we have the options of BASE, BASE + SOURCES, FULL, FULL + SOURCES durning installation. But with how easy package installation is after the initial install using

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

>> >> At this stage all I wanted to do was to get only a directory list of what >> is on the music CD in the DVD tray. >> >> >> Any pointers (anyone) of what else I need to do? >> >> >> This is the first time ever for me to, in DOS, ever tried t

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

lert Sent: Thursday, 3 March 2022 10:46 PM To: Technical discussion and questions for FreeDOS developers. Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0 > At present the built in DVD drive (on the HP laptop) is not > working with FreeDOS (will try to spend more time to solve this &

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

lert Sent: Thursday, 3 March 2022 10:46 PM To: Technical discussion and questions for FreeDOS developers. Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0 > At present the built in DVD drive (on the HP laptop) is not > working with FreeDOS (will try to spend more time to solve this &

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi Eric, > Hi! I agree that it is not really useful to use ClamAV in DOS. > By now, it has a list of millions of virus signatures of which > basically all will be for Windows viruses anyway. You need more > than 200 MB for a typical signature database for it and opening > it takes ages before you

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Just another perspective: I'm using mainly DOS and Linux. DOS about 30 years, Linux about 10 years. But I've used many other OSs for work. I'm mainly a user, not a programmer, but I probably have enough experience to have an opinion... I think that DOS and Linux are very different from any

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi! I agree that it is not really useful to use ClamAV in DOS. By now, it has a list of millions of virus signatures of which basically all will be for Windows viruses anyway. You need more than 200 MB for a typical signature database for it and opening it takes ages before you can even scan

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi Wilhelm, > clamav seems not to work. if it should work i did not find out how. I see. I only tried once for short and also couldn't get it to work. > freedos av which is also available at ibiblio works with restrictions > and a very old 20 mb database from clamav, an actual one has in about

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Wilhelm Spiegl said: > clamav seems not to work. if it should work > i did not find out how. freedos av which is > also available at ibiblio works with > restrictions and a very old 20 mb database > from clamav, an actual one has in about > 170 mb and did not work. I never used ClamAV in DOS,

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

On Sat, Mar 5, 2022, 3:45 AM Robert Riebisch wrote: > Hi Wilhelm, > > [..] > > With an updated fdimples and wget (which also supports no NLS in FD) it > > would be possible to find and add new games / files / tools / whatever > > from a server - and Jim has the chance to announce it whenever

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi Wilhelm, > a) have a look at the bug list, e.g. xdel (reported by you), edit > (reported by me has several bugs), fdisk > (reported by me: sizes for a primary size > 1000 MB cannot be entered as > a value), fd antivirus (only works with a 10 years old virus definition What is FD Antivirus? Do

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi Jim, > 1. Move to a "rolling release" > [...] A FreeDOS "rolling-release" distro already exists. Its name is SvarDOS and you can find it at . SvarDOS has been created and is maintained mainly by Mateusz Viste. It is based on his experiences with his former FreeDOS

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

We're still working on that telepathic user interface and all those things we've dreamed Microsoft put into MS-DOS. I'm still working on everything I have sent in, but it would be nice if I got some direction on things that can be improved. Gregory On 3/3/2022 5:28 PM, Deposite Pirate wrote:

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

On Thu, 3 Mar 2022 00:13:32 -0600 Jim Hall wrote: > On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 4:16 PM Jim Hall wrote: > [..] > > I'm sure we'll want to discuss "1.4" or "2.0" or whatever version > > comes after 1.3. (I can start a new conversation next week to talk > > about that.) > > > Now that FreeDOS 1.3

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> On Mar 3, 2022, at 10:42 AM, Adam Peart wrote: > > Personally in the test stream I would like an updated LiveCD, and a way of > updating the files for an already installed FreeDos. For an existing > installed version, I don't like the idea of having to re-install everything > every time

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Personally in the test stream I would like an updated LiveCD, and a way of updating the files for an already installed FreeDos. For an existing installed version, I don't like the idea of having to re-install everything every time there's updates. I would prefer just updating all the

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi Jim, I think there is still so much to do on FreeDOS itself that you should work a little slower with updates and new version numbers. Some examples:   a) have a look at the bug list, e.g. xdel (reported by you), edit (reported by me has several bugs), fdisk (reported by me: sizes for a

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> At present the built in DVD drive (on the HP laptop) is not > working with FreeDOS (will try to spend more time to solve this > problem) - have yet to try an external USB DVD blue-ray (but this > will be a while before I try). I have no CD only drives at all. there is a good chance that

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

> On Mar 3, 2022, at 5:33 AM, richardkolacz...@hotmail.com wrote: > [..] > So with your plans on more frequent releases - (USB only wise) - where does > it leave me? Although, your using a USB stick. Your using it as your HD. So, I’d consider that installed and not Live. You would probably

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

7:56 PM To: FreeDOS Developers Subject: Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0 Hi, > On Mar 3, 2022, at 1:13 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 4:16 PM Jim Hall wrote: > [..] >> I'm sure we'll want to discuss "1.4" or "2.0" or whatever versi

Re: [Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

Hi, > On Mar 3, 2022, at 1:13 AM, Jim Hall wrote: > > On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 4:16 PM Jim Hall wrote: > [..] >> I'm sure we'll want to discuss "1.4" or "2.0" or whatever version >> comes after 1.3. (I can start a new conversation next week to talk >> about that.) > > > Now that FreeDOS 1.3

[Freedos-devel] Thinking about FreeDOS 2.0

On Sun, Feb 20, 2022 at 4:16 PM Jim Hall wrote: [..] > I'm sure we'll want to discuss "1.4" or "2.0" or whatever version > comes after 1.3. (I can start a new conversation next week to talk > about that.) Now that FreeDOS 1.3 has been out for a little while, I wanted to start thinking about